Comments on: NASA’s Hansen: Implications of ‘Peak Oil’ for Atmospheric CO2 and Climate http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:31:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 By: Paul K http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5567 Paul K Sat, 08 Sep 2007 20:20:06 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5567 Joe, Is Hansen saying that using coal in a way that provided carbon capture and sequestration is okay? Would you say that even if carbon capture and sequestration were economically feasible, which it is not, coal to liquid fails to meet the efficiency requirement? Joe,
Is Hansen saying that using coal in a way that provided carbon capture and sequestration is okay? Would you say that even if carbon capture and sequestration were economically feasible, which it is not, coal to liquid fails to meet the efficiency requirement?

]]> By: Joe http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5568 Joe Sat, 08 Sep 2007 21:59:48 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5568 Yes, Hansen is saying that coal with CCS is okay. Clearly CCS will not be cost-effective until CO2 has a price -- around $30 a ton is what the CCS experts say. Liquid coal is not part of the solution to global warming, with or without CCS. Yes, Hansen is saying that coal with CCS is okay. Clearly CCS will not be cost-effective until CO2 has a price — around $30 a ton is what the CCS experts say. Liquid coal is not part of the solution to global warming, with or without CCS.

]]> By: Lou Grinzo http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5569 Lou Grinzo Sun, 09 Sep 2007 00:08:30 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5569 The interaction of PO and GW is something that concerns me a great deal. Without PO in the picture, we would have a hard time finding the political spine to address GW properly. Unless Joe runs for and becomes president and makes Al Gore his Grand Poobah of All Things Environmental. But I digress. With PO, or as I'm calling in my writing, the oil crunch, we will have an enormous incentive to resort to liquid coal. And with the higher costs of oil-based energy, we will want to find cheap energy wherever we can, which till mean non-CCS coal-fired electricity--yet another siren call we must ignore. If the PO people I trust (ASPO, Chris Skrebowski) are right, and the worldwide peak in oil production arrives in 2010 to 2011 (i.e. well within the lifetime of any recently purchased SUV), we're going to have one enormous set of challenges on our hands. The interaction of PO and GW is something that concerns me a great deal.

Without PO in the picture, we would have a hard time finding the political spine to address GW properly. Unless Joe runs for and becomes president and makes Al Gore his Grand Poobah of All Things Environmental. But I digress.

With PO, or as I’m calling in my writing, the oil crunch, we will have an enormous incentive to resort to liquid coal. And with the higher costs of oil-based energy, we will want to find cheap energy wherever we can, which till mean non-CCS coal-fired electricity–yet another siren call we must ignore.

If the PO people I trust (ASPO, Chris Skrebowski) are right, and the worldwide peak in oil production arrives in 2010 to 2011 (i.e. well within the lifetime of any recently purchased SUV), we’re going to have one enormous set of challenges on our hands.

]]> By: Paul K http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5572 Paul K Sun, 09 Sep 2007 07:44:43 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5572 Joe, If we reach peak oil by 2010, the market for alternatives and efficiency wouldn't need any assist from government. The consensus seems to be that PO a long way off. Is there now a market price for CO2? This is off topic, but a while back you asked for suggestions for the right side column on your page. Mine is that under the book blurb you display your "mission statement". Global warming is a serious problem. A drastic reduction in CO2 emissions is required to avoid possible/probable catastrophe. The necessary reductions can be attained through efficiencies, renewables and technological advancements in alternative energy sources without social or economic upheaval or higher net taxes. I'd then like to see your rules for offsets. Joe,
If we reach peak oil by 2010, the market for alternatives and efficiency wouldn’t need any assist from government. The consensus seems to be that PO a long way off.
Is there now a market price for CO2?
This is off topic, but a while back you asked for suggestions for the right side column on your page. Mine is that under the book blurb you display your “mission statement”. Global warming is a serious problem. A drastic reduction in CO2 emissions is required to avoid possible/probable catastrophe. The necessary reductions can be attained through efficiencies, renewables and technological advancements in alternative energy sources without social or economic upheaval or higher net taxes. I’d then like to see your rules for offsets.

]]> By: Joe http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5578 Joe Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:45:25 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5578 We are clearly peaking in conventional oil outside of the Persian Gulf. The unknown is how much the Gulf can increase production and how much unconventional oil can be brought on. Most forms of unconventional oil are really bad for climate change -- so I suspect that next decade, just as the world starts to get serious about climate change, it will really start feeling the strains of peak oil. The good news is that if you solve the global warming problem, you solve the peak oil problem (but not necessarily vice versa). I confess I have not yet finished my rules for offsets, but when I do, I will definitely create one post that includes them all -- and I certainly hope to be able to put posts like that on the right-hand column. We are clearly peaking in conventional oil outside of the Persian Gulf. The unknown is how much the Gulf can increase production and how much unconventional oil can be brought on. Most forms of unconventional oil are really bad for climate change — so I suspect that next decade, just as the world starts to get serious about climate change, it will really start feeling the strains of peak oil.

The good news is that if you solve the global warming problem, you solve the peak oil problem (but not necessarily vice versa).

I confess I have not yet finished my rules for offsets, but when I do, I will definitely create one post that includes them all — and I certainly hope to be able to put posts like that on the right-hand column.

]]> By: John McCormick http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5583 John McCormick Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:27:19 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5583 Joe: Your comment; The good news is that if you solve the global warming problem, you solve the peak oil problem (but not necessarily vice versa). is just a random thought without some kind of time line. You cannot just throw these comments down and expect your cridibility to survive. Think China, India...etc. building new coal-fired capacity and automobiles at a rate we cannot even grasp and then tell your readers what you mean by; [The good news is that if you solve the global warming problem, you solve the peak oil problem (but not necessarily vice versa).] For me, the good news is that if I win the lottery, I can quit my job! I can think of other good news comments but I rest my case. Joe:

Your comment;

The good news is that if you solve the global warming problem, you solve the peak oil problem (but not necessarily vice versa).

is just a random thought without some kind of time line. You cannot just throw these comments down and expect your cridibility to survive.

Think China, India…etc. building new coal-fired capacity and automobiles at a rate we cannot even grasp and then tell your readers what you mean by;

[The good news is that if you solve the global warming problem, you solve the peak oil problem (but not necessarily vice versa).]

For me, the good news is that if I win the lottery, I can quit my job! I can think of other good news comments but I rest my case.

]]> By: Joe http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5585 Joe Mon, 10 Sep 2007 14:12:48 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5585 John: I was replying to a comment, and don't typically repeat all the arguments and analysis I have made over the years in every post. I do spell out the full solution in my book -- and have touched on the key elements of the solution in the blog. I have been thinking of doing a series of posts laying out the solution, and your comment will be more motivatation. John:

I was replying to a comment, and don’t typically repeat all the arguments and analysis I have made over the years in every post. I do spell out the full solution in my book — and have touched on the key elements of the solution in the blog.

I have been thinking of doing a series of posts laying out the solution, and your comment will be more motivatation.

]]> By: John McCormick http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5586 John McCormick Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:29:09 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5586 Joe, thank you for that comment. I look forward to reading and participating in the solution(s) posts. Joe, thank you for that comment. I look forward to reading and participating in the solution(s) posts.

]]> By: Colin Wright http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5592 Colin Wright Mon, 10 Sep 2007 21:22:53 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/09/08/nasas-hansen-implications-of-%e2%80%98peak-oil%e2%80%99-for-atmospheric-co2-and-climate/#comment-5592 "The good news is that if you solve the global warming problem, you solve the peak oil problem (but not necessarily vice versa)." What if solving GW is as simple as phasing out (unsequestered) coal? Won't we still have a problem getting people to work with diminishing amounts of oil and natural gas? “The good news is that if you solve the global warming problem, you solve the peak oil problem (but not necessarily vice versa).”

What if solving GW is as simple as phasing out (unsequestered) coal?

Won’t we still have a problem getting people to work with diminishing amounts of oil and natural gas?

]]>